Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1887-09-21


from It'll street to New Jersey avenue; r. from 7th
to 9th; g, from LIST to New Jersey avenue; 5th, |
from o to Boundary; N, from 5tn to New Jersey
avenue, from 9th to Boundary. Division No 5: |
18th. from to T; 18th, from Il to S; 18TH from T
10th to 18th Division No g 8: 1SS nom %
!, from 2Oeh to New Hampshire avenue; 23d from
Ito, to Pennsylvania avenue @ from nth 70 Connec
Pennsylvania avenue to N; Corcoran, from 18th
to 18th. All the above were recommended to be
West washington requests the improvement OF
the following streets: Fayette 35th) 4th O),
Ersdsick CATH Road Prospect avenue unsan
appropriation bin for the sum Of 80 90 immedi-
sss ansns q ssss
ana paving the roadways with asphalt or asphalt
blocks on Pennsylvania avenue southeast, from
costa.
81 MI INV HWsIsr moved that the report be adopt
IL 70 the District Commissioners
Mr.. NATT1NGLY INQUIRIES FOR FACTS
MT. VIM. T. Mattingly said that he knew moth
Ing OF the facts alleged In the report but he said
that he would like to know II any member OF the
committee knew Of any instances where the ap-
the improvement of another street. He thought
That statements unless based on facts ought not
70 receive the approval OF the committee, and for
this reason he made tho inquiry.
Mr.. Larner replied that the report did not go
into details the committee did not consider 1t
He would cite the case Of E street in south wash
1ngtOn: Year before last Sic, 600 had been apprO-
priated for It's Improvement but not one cent was
uses. The same thing had been going on ever
since the change in the form OF government. Last
same Street, but the worK had not BEEN end done.
The gentlemen living in East washington have
similar experiences to relate Such things are Or
commissioners admit 1t.
MIR. Charles Pelham said that a case in point
was the appropriation made last year Of s., 5000
for the improvement of the Eastern Branch road
and other roads. The Commissioners, in violation
OF the law, spent this money on the other roads.
and none on the Eastern Branch road.
Mr.. Mattingly said that this case illustrated
what he had said that no statement OF fact
s s go 10Th from this committee unless the
facts were well known and clearly proven. He
said that there is no such road known as the
Eastern Branch road and the Commissioners were
IN doubt what was meant. They could not spend
the money on q road that was not in existence.
Inc ROAD That was meant by Congress could not
De asGertalned, 50 they expended the money on
Mr.. NJ. l. Weller said that an appropriation was
made for Virginia avenue, and the contract was
quently informed by the Commissioners that the
money mad been expended elsewhere, and the work
couio not 60 on under his contract.
auOn mace last year for the improvement OF
North Capitol street. between and +. In Decem-
per last IL was stated at the District Office that the
WofA was 0elayed on account OF bad weather, but
that IL would go on In the spring. Now they are
nnlsning the Improvements, he said, out OF the
appropriation for the present year.
Mr. w. c. Dodge cited the case or 9Th street east,
tol which appropriations had been made he said,
ior iour different years. and nothing was done
for years In the Distr1ct-this diversion OF appro
pr1atlons. Congress last year appropriated $4,000
l0r CaPltol HUI, and put in the provso that 1t
improving North Capitol street had not been let
ye because one Official at the District offices said
eney were afraid mat there was not money enough
10 90 tne work. Another official said that this
street was the dividing line between two sections,
and mat owing to the smallness OF the appropria-
lions for the northwest section, they proposed to
take the money for improving one-hair OF North
Capitol street and expend it on other streets So
taat, as Iaat half OF the street was not 70 be I'm
proved, Inc other half could not be. He said that
no contracts had as yet been let for street; why
he was unable to say.
Mr.. w. II. singleton said that the representative
commute was organized for practical purposes,
ana II they can get what is asked II Is not good
pOilcy 10 go into criticisms OF past acts. II the
commissioners Will endorse the schedule OF streets
for improvements that is all the committee wants,
and there was no use in bringing in other mat
terS ne offered an amendment to strike out all
OF the report except the schedule street improve
ments.
THE COST OF THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS.
Mr. r. T. MOrsell asked Mr.. Larner IL he knew
how much money the improvements asked tor in
the schedule would cost. Mr.. Larner said he did
not.
Mr.. Weller. a member Of the committee, said
that an estimate had been made, and it was be-
neved that the total amount would come within
the one million dollars which Col. Ludlow pro-
ject
Mr.. A. c. Richards said that as there seemed
to be some question to the cost involved in this
schedule he thought 1t would be best to defer ac-
ton until the next meeting and have the report
estimates must be In the hands Of the Secretary Of
the Treasury by october l. that II any action was
taken IT must be at this meeting.
Cnfh vrno nNt ~fo1I
whether the statements in the report were adopted
or not The main thing was the schedule, and he
suggested division OF the report
Mr. LARNER STANDS BY THE REPORT
Mr. Larner observed that the report seemed to
have stirred up hornets nest. There was no OBJ
lection to the report except for the expression OF
opinion relative to the conduct OF the District
officials, and at that there was kicking. He
committee ought to stand by their colors and not
be afraid to express an opinion in regard to acts
which are known to be contrary to law. The re-
port made no charges against the present Commits
sioners. 1t condemns no one. but simply asks
that the committee take notice Of this conduct Oh
the part OF the District government and that steps
be taken to prevent recurrence in the future |
When citizens secure appropriations from Con- |
gress by their individual Efforts for certain pur-
sioners execution Of the law, he wanted to know
II citizens were expected TO take 1t meekly. They
did not care for the past, but the committee |
The committee understood that their duty was to |
call the attention OF the committee to any gr1ev.
ance that was brought to their notice. |
Mr. II. b. MOultOn said that in his opinion there
was nothing In the report that reflected upon the
commissioners but upon practice |
Mr.. Mattingly said that he supposed the report |
those OF eighteen or twenty years ago. He thought
that the practice referred to- Ii it existed ought
very properly to be censured.
Mr.. r. Ross Perry said that the report ought not |
10 oe ADOPTED without some definite idea OF the |
cost involved In carrying out the proposed I'm |
prOvements. He also objected to accepting the |
conclusions OF any committee unless the facts
upon which they are based are also submitted lie !
asked MI Larner what District Official had stated
that the Government owed the District IS 600 600
Mr.. Larner said that Mr.. Ross Fish, the assessor
OF the District, had been credited with the state
ment In IRE STAR that for a number OF years the |
District had been raising more than one-half OF !
aggregated this sum.
Mr.. Perry replied that the statement was there
fore, not ofiicial and might be or might not be
consideration OF the report |
Capt. Tyler said that the grievances OF the peo-
pie ought not to be overlooked. 1t was on &C |
count Of these that the committee had been |
formed, and long as the Committee is right there
Is nothing to rear. He thought that there was no
need TO sugar coat the report simply with the hope
OF getting ravors from the Commissioners.
NOT AN ATTACK ON THE COMMISSIONERS.
Mr.. Larner said that the idea that the commit |
tee wished to make an attack upon the Commits |
stOners by their report was entirely false. Such
thing was entirely foreign from their ideas. The |
commissioners had treated the committee with |
great courtesy. The facts as stated in the report
would be admitted by the Commissioners. Col,
Ludlow told member OF this committee that they |